Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” : HYDERABAD
Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE)
BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 147/HYD/2018 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Suryachakra Power Dy.Commissioner of Corporation Limited, Vs Income Tax, HYDERABAD Circle-3(2), [PAN: AACCS8126J] HYDERABAD
(Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : NONE For Revenue : Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, DR Date of Hearing : 23-02-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 26-04-2021 O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for AY.2010-11 arises from the CIT(A)-3, Hyderabad’s order dated 17-11-2017 passed in case No.0250 / DCIT-3(2) / Hyd / CIT(A)-3 / 2016-17 in proceedings u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, ‘the Act’]. Case called twice. None appeared at assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
We have heard learned departmental representative and perused the case file. The assessee’s sole substantive grievance in the instant appeal seeks to reverse both the learned lower authorities’ action disallowing Section 35D deduction of
:- 2 -: ITA No. 147/Hyd/2018
Rs.65,37,790/- in the course of assessment as upheld in the CIT(A)’s order. The assessment findings to this effect read as under: “5. For the A.Y: 2008-09, the assessee company incurred an amount of Rs.7,17,72,480/- for 'public issue expenses' and the eligible deduction was considered by the assessee at Rs.5,22,19,980/- being 5% of Rs.104,43,99,605/-, claiming to be the total capital employed. However, it was noticed from the balance sheet that the assessee raised share capital of Rs.34,00,00,000/- only and raised long term borrowing from Syndicate Bank for Rs.5,06,20,636/- and thereby the total increased value of capital employed works out to Rs. 39,06,20,636/- as against the claim of the assessee at Rs. 104,43,99,605/-. Thus the eligible deduction was determined at Rs.1,95,31,032/- being 5% of the capital employed of Rs.39,06,20,636/-. Accordingly, the deduction u/s.35D was allowed at Rs.39,06,206/- being 1/5th of the eligible deduction of Rs.1,95,31,032/-. 6. As the above issue has got a cascading effect for the year under consideration, the eligible deduction u/s.35D needs to be restricted to Rs.39,06,206/- as against the claim of Rs.1,04,43,996/-”. 2.1. It is sufficiently clear that we are dealing with instance of amortization relief therein the initial AY.2008-09 has already adopted the sum in issue as Rs.39,06,20,636/- as against that claimed of Rs.104,43,99,605/- and both the learned lower authorities have themselves granted 5% relief u/s.35D qua the said correct figure only. The same has gone un-rebutted throughout. We find no reason to interfere with the impugned disallowance therefore. The assessee fails in this sole substantive grievance. 3. This assessee’s appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 26th April, 2021
Sd/- Sd/- (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) (S.S.GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 26-04-2021 TNMM
:- 3 -: ITA No. 147/Hyd/2018
Copy to : 1.Suryachakra Power Corporation Limited, C/o.Samuel Nagadesi, Chartered Accountant, 408, Sri Ramakrishna Towers, Beside Image Hospitals, Ameer Pet, Hyderabad. 2.The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(2), Hyderabad. 3.CIT(Appeals)-3, Hyderabad. 4.Pr.CIT-3, Hyderabad. 5.D.R. ITAT, Hyderabad. 6.Guard File.